Dillard v. Burt

Filing 61

ORDER denying petitioner's second Motion for relief from judgment 60 . Signed by District Judge George Caram Steeh. (MBea)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION EDDIE L. DILLARD, Petitioner, vs. WILLIE O. SMITH, (WARDEN), Defendant. _____________________________/ ORDER DENYING PETITIONER'S SECOND MOTION FOR RELIEF FROM JUDGMENT (#60) Petitioner Eddie Dillard moved for relief from judgment on June 13, 2008 arguing his 1997 state court convictions and sentence should be vacated because the Michigan Office of Secretary of State was not in possession of a public record indicating that the presiding state court judge had been administered an oath of office. The court denied the motion on June 18, 2008 as untimely and frivolous. On September 9, 2008, the court denied Dillard's motion for reconsideration, finding the motion simply reiterated the same frivolous arguments. Dillard's instant motion for relief from judgment again raises the same frivolous arguments. Accordingly, Dillard's second motion for relief from judgment is hereby DENIED as frivolous and untimely. Petitioner Dillard is hereby forewarned that his further filing of frivolous motions may result in the imposition of sanctions against him, including but not limited to losing his ability to appear in forma pauperis in future civil actions and a substantial fine. See Gordon v. United States, No. 2:01-CV-1166, 2008 WL 2949415, *3 (S.D. Ohio July 29, 2008) Case No. 03-CV-71269 HON. GEORGE CARAM STEEH (quoting In re Walker, 238 F.3d 426 (6th Cir. 2000)). SO ORDERED. Dated: September 29, 2008 s/George Caram Steeh GEORGE CARAM STEEH UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE Copies of this Order were served upon attorneys of record on September 29, 2008, by electronic and/or ordinary mail. s/Josephine Chaffee Deputy Clerk 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?